Undervalued Cricketers

[big_e]

Marcus North.

Inconsistent enough to be a third Marsh brother but scored 100s in England (Wales), South Africa, NZ and England yet somehow never at home. Averaged 35 with the bat and took 14 wickets @ 42 bowling part time offies and everyone wanted him gone.

Strong Marsh comparison. North was dismissed for less than ten in 15 of his 35 innings.

Actually his figures are extraordinary - his last 19 innings, he had three 90+ scores and nothing else over 26.

 

[sandeano]

C

- Alec Stewart. Criminally under appreciated considering what he gave that side in terms of an aggressive batsman who was absolutely amazing against pace... shit against spin, and consistently opened or took the gloves depending on what was asked of him. They didn’t have much success while he was in the side but geez they got some value out of him.

Alec Stewart always reminded me of one of those Sgt Majors in those old British war films. Not the most talented, but he would do anything for the team without question.

Stewart, will you keep?

"Yes sir!"

Will you open?

"Yes Sir!"

While we're at it, will you captain too?

"Sir, yes sir!"

 

[PhatBoy]

Alec Stewart always reminded me of one of those Sgt Majors in those old British war films. Not the most talented, but he would do anything for the team without question.

Stewart, will you keep?

"Yes sir!"

Will you open?

"Yes Sir!"

While we're at it, will you captain too?

"Sir, yes sir!"

Haha great point. He’d actually not look out of place photoshopped into a black and white soldier photo come to think of it

 

[sandeano]

Probably my favourite batsman of all-time.

The ability of Martyn to simply angle the bat and provide the slightest pressure against the ball and see it glide through a pair of fielders to the boundary was sublime. One of the great batsmen to watch in my near-50 years.

 

[Damon_3388]

Doug Bollinger

Tests - 12 matches, 50 wickets, 25.92 average, 48.02 strike rate, 3.23 economy rate, final Test at age 29
ODIs - 39 matches, 62 wickets, 23.90 average, 31.32 strike rate, 4.57 economy rate, final ODI at age 30
T20Is - 9 matches, 9 wickets, 27.66 average, 23.33 strike rate, 7.11 economy rate, final T20I at age 33

Got scapegoated in the wake of the disastrous Adelaide Test in 2010 (without that match, his Test numbers would be 23.79 average, 45.45 strike rate, 3.14 economy rate), struggled with a few injuries after that, and never really got much of a look in again.

Clint McKay

Tests - 1 match, 1 wickets, 101.00 average, 168.00 strike rate, 3.60 economy rate, final Test at age 26
ODIs - 59 matches, 97 wickets, 24.37 average, 30.57 strike rate, 4.78 economy rate, final ODI at age 30
T20Is - 6 matches, 4 wickets, 45.75 average, 34.00 strike rate, 8.07 economy rate, final T20I at age 30

Was close to the #1 pace bowler in ODI cricket at one stage. His last 10 ODIs (49.30 average, 50.40 strike rate, 5.86 economy rate) ruined him. Deserved more than one Test at the time as well. Strange how ineffective he was in T20Is, as well, given his BBL form and ODI success. I always wondered what made his name "Mac-eye" intead of "Mac-ay", too.

 

[sandeano]

Haha great point. He’d actually not look out of place photoshopped into a black and white soldier photo come to think of it

Always had the greatest respect for the guy. True working class character and had his plate far too loaded than he deserved. Competent in all roles, but not great at any. In a decent team he would have succeeded in one and been an English great.


Never less than fair and decent in all his play, he was, and remains, one of the few players I reckon I would love to have a beer with.

 

[Wedge McManus]

214 Test wickets at 30.28, basically on workrate and heart, is worthy of much more respect that it gets. Doesn't make him one of our all-time greatest pace bowlers, but puts him in the company of those second-tier solid servants like Merv Hughes (his spiritual predecessor), Billy McDermott, Geoff Lawson, etc.

And geez the way people talk about him on this forum you'd think it was him who took some sandpaper to the ball. Probably shouldn't have been picked for the Indian Odis but it wasn't his fault that he was. He bowled his ring off in tests for us. Often without great support and had a few catches go down. Managed to change his stocky body shape into something much more streamlined too. On ya sids

 

[PhatBoy]

Always had the greatest respect for the guy. True working class character and had his plate far too loaded than he deserved. Competent in all roles, but not great at any. In a decent team he would have succeeded in one and been an English great.


Never less than fair and decent in all his play, he was, and remains, one of the few players I reckon I would love to have a beer with.

Agree with all of that. I think had he been allowed to simply be an opening or number 3 batsman, nothing else, he’d have been considered alongside Gooch as the best opener they’ve had over the last 40 years since Boycott up until cook. He was absolutely brutal on fast bowlers at his best.
He also had the misfortune of playing literally 80 tests against Australia, South Africa and the West Indies in a 13 year period where they were head and shoulders above every other team on the planet

 

[Damon_3388]

I think a lot of the great bats of the 90's/00's who couldn't displace the golden lineup are undervalued compared to Hodge because they didn't whine to the press as much during and after their careers; i.e. Martin Love, Phil Jaques, Stuart Law, Di Venuto.

Was Di Venuto really that good, compared to the others? I guess his point of difference was that he was a left-handed, attacking opener (and we were kind of searching for one to partner with Tubby after Slats got dropped the first time), and he was at it for a really long time (140 Shield matches) but he averaged "just" 41.73 in Shield cricket (19 hundreds, 67 fifties), which isn't that special when compared to contemporaries like Matthew Elliott (47.29, 32 hundreds, 48 fifties average bought down by more than 5 runs per innings due to three final seasons in SA without a ton), Matthew Hayden (54.95, 25 hundreds, 33 fifties), or Justin Langer (52.25, 29 hundreds, 35 fifties). His overall record is padded out by years of county cricket in a weak-ish era, much of which was spent playing in Div 2 with Derbyshire.

 

[Wedge McManus]

For me Andrew Strauss is probably the most underrated player in the last twenty years. No surprise he entered the England setup and they remembered how to win again. Great captain and terrific slip catcher. Hard as nails and the icing on the cake was when he called pietersen a c*nt on live TV and everyone loved it! Feel so bad for him losing his wife recently. Thoroughly good bloke

 

[PhatBoy]

And geez the way people talk about him on this forum you'd think it was him who took some sandpaper to the ball. Probably shouldn't have been picked for the Indian Odis but it wasn't his fault that he was. He bowled his ring off in tests for us. Often without great support and had a few catches go down. Managed to change his stocky body shape into something much more streamlined too. On ya sids

That’s one of the reasons he’s derided a bit though. He got those wickets through literally little more than willpower and the fact that he could drive his body to bowl at reasonable pace (I’ve read the figure 150 in here about him - that’s utter bullshit but nonetheless he was around 140 often) and at least hit a spot repeatedly.

His slimming down robbed him of any pace and without any tricks to offset that diminished speed it’s left him fairly toothless

 

[PhatBoy]

Was Di Venuto really that good, compared to the others? I guess his point of difference was that he was a left-handed, attacking opener (and we were kind of searching for one to partner with Tubby after Slats got dropped the first time), and he was at it for a really long time (140 Shield matches) but he averaged "just" 41.73 in Shield cricket (19 hundreds, 67 fifties), which isn't that special when compared to contemporaries like Matthew Elliott (47.29, 32 hundreds, 48 fifties average bought down by more than 5 runs per innings due to three final seasons in SA without a ton), Matthew Hayden (54.95, 25 hundreds, 33 fifties), or Justin Langer (52.25, 29 hundreds, 35 fifties). His overall record is padded out by years of county cricket in a weak-ish era, much of which was spent playing in Div 2 with Derbyshire.

Divenuto played predominantly in a side that had only Jamie Cox and Dene Hills averaging over 40 (hills almost 40 exactly) across his 15 years - Ponting was rarely around, Bevan arrived late in his career.
So easy runs weren’t something Divenuto would have scored a lot of. He also played half his cricket in Hobart and while I don’t know the figures I would guess that the conditions in general would have made it harder to bat there than anywhere on the mainland by and large. He wasn’t a superstar but he would have had no issue handling test cricket.

Just remember when comparing him to someone like Elliott, how much cricket Elliott played at the pre-drop in version of the Adelaide Oval in the second half of his career

 

[Wedge McManus]

That’s one of the reasons he’s derided a bit though. He got those wickets through literally little more than willpower and the fact that he could drive his body to bowl at reasonable pace (I’ve read the figure 150 in here about him - that’s utter bullshit but nonetheless he was around 140 often) and at least hit a spot repeatedly.

His slimming down robbed him of any pace and without any tricks to offset that diminished speed it’s left him fairly toothless

It's a shame he wasn't able to reach that genuine speed he had during that 2-3 year period where he was taking test hatricks and knocking blokes over with pace and accuracy in his later years. Was a great bowler for us. Probably bowled himself into the ground although I disagree with the inference losing his bulk robbed him of his capacity to bowl quick. The lack of extra weight on his joints would have been great for his rig. And lots of blokes are off the grog and red meat now and lose nothing in terms of speed and strength. That's a myth imo. Probably alot healthier in all honesty. I reckon he just had his small window of youthful invincibility and got a bit older and slower and his window closed. Hopefully starcy's hasn't closed on him too

 

[Wedge McManus]

Martyn suffers a bit in perception as his best Test Innings were in Asian conditions where not many people would have watched them - he was a big reason we won those series in Sri Lanka and India in the mid 2000s

Best back foot player I've ever seen. Kane Williamson doesn't hold a candle to his back foot punch through the covers

 

[PhatBoy]

It's a shame he wasn't able to reach that genuine speed he had during that 2-3 year period where he was taking test hatricks and knocking blokes over with pace and accuracy in his later years. Was a great bowler for us. Probably bowled himself into the ground although I disagree with the inference losing his bulk robbed him of his capacity to bowl quick. The lack of extra weight on his joints would have been great for his rig. And lots of blokes are off the grog and red meat now and lose nothing in terms of speed and strength. That's a myth imo. Probably alot healthier in all honesty. I reckon he just had his small window of youthful invincibility and got a bit older and slower and his window closed. Hopefully starcy's hasn't closed on him too

It is undoubtedly good for health and stamina but outside of freak athletes like Rabada or Michael Holding, fast bowling (especially for those not 7 feet tall) speed owes so much to muscularity and bulk. Look at someone like Shannon Gabriel. Just a big lump of a bloke - if he got skinny he’d lose so much of what makes him a good bowler I reckon. Starc’s build will keep him quick for years so I don’t think you’ve got much to worry about there.

 

[Wedge McManus]

It is undoubtedly good for health and stamina but outside of freak athletes like Rabada or Michael Holding, fast bowling (especially for those not 7 feet tall) speed owes so much to muscularity and bulk. Look at someone like Shannon Gabriel. Just a big lump of a bloke - if he got skinny he’d lose so much of what makes him a good bowler I reckon. Starc’s build will keep him quick for years so I don’t think you’ve got much to worry about there.

Gabriel looks like a tank of a man. cold stare as well. Wouldn't want to p**s him off. Looks like he's only a bad umpiring decision away from punching someone

 

[Damon_3388]

It is undoubtedly good for health and stamina but outside of freak athletes like Rabada or Michael Holding, fast bowling (especially for those not 7 feet tall) speed owes so much to muscularity and bulk. Look at someone like Shannon Gabriel. Just a big lump of a bloke - if he got skinny he’d lose so much of what makes him a good bowler I reckon. Starc’s build will keep him quick for years so I don’t think you’ve got much to worry about there.

For most, bowling (and throwing, in baseball) speed has more to do with core strength and stability, as well as technique, than it does sheer muscularity and bulk.

 

[Wedge McManus]

For most, bowling (and throwing, in baseball) speed has more to do with core strength and stability, as well as technique, than it does sheer muscularity and bulk.

Did Bumrah have much bulk on him? Heck no and he was running three yards and bowling 145+. Dale steyn another good example. Brett Lee as well, Trent Boult quick on his day thin as a blade of grass. James Anderson in his youth was as skinny as my bank balance and as fast as my step dads mouth. Jhye Richardson looks like a starving teenager too

 

[PhatBoy]

Did Bumrah have much bulk on him? Heck no and he was running three yards and bowling 145+. Dale steyn another good example. Brett Lee as well, Trent Boult quick on his day thin as a blade of grass. James Anderson in his youth was as skinny as my bank balance and as fast as my step dads mouth. Jhye Richardson looks like a starving teenager too

Steyn is cut as shit and Brett Lee was a physical rolls royce

 

[PhatBoy]

For most, bowling (and throwing, in baseball) speed has more to do with core strength and stability, as well as technique, than it does sheer muscularity and bulk.

Have one look at Siddle at his peak and tell me that he belongs in the category of bowlers who’s speed and penetration came from economy of action or athleticism.

 

[ioppolo]

John Hastings. People give shit to the lad but he has a solid ODI record (Amla smashing him around the WACA in his only test aside). Would've played more had Starc and Cummins not string it together when they did

 

[big_e]

Doug Bollinger

Tests - 12 matches, 50 wickets, 25.92 average, 48.02 strike rate, 3.23 economy rate, final Test at age 29
ODIs - 39 matches, 62 wickets, 23.90 average, 31.32 strike rate, 4.57 economy rate, final ODI at age 30
T20Is - 9 matches, 9 wickets, 27.66 average, 23.33 strike rate, 7.11 economy rate, final T20I at age 33

Got scapegoated in the wake of the disastrous Adelaide Test in 2010 (without that match, his Test numbers would be 23.79 average, 45.45 strike rate, 3.14 economy rate), struggled with a few injuries after that, and never really got much of a look in again.

Clint McKay

Tests - 1 match, 1 wickets, 101.00 average, 168.00 strike rate, 3.60 economy rate, final Test at age 26
ODIs - 59 matches, 97 wickets, 24.37 average, 30.57 strike rate, 4.78 economy rate, final ODI at age 30
T20Is - 6 matches, 4 wickets, 45.75 average, 34.00 strike rate, 8.07 economy rate, final T20I at age 30

Was close to the #1 pace bowler in ODI cricket at one stage. His last 10 ODIs (49.30 average, 50.40 strike rate, 5.86 economy rate) ruined him. Deserved more than one Test at the time as well. Strange how ineffective he was in T20Is, as well, given his BBL form and ODI success. I always wondered what made his name "Mac-eye" intead of "Mac-ay", too.

Right on McKay. It's unfortunate that people remember that one test instead of his very good ODI career.

 

[Sproj]

That’s one of the reasons he’s derided a bit though. He got those wickets through literally little more than willpower and the fact that he could drive his body to bowl at reasonable pace (I’ve read the figure 150 in here about him - that’s utter bullshit but nonetheless he was around 140 often) and at least hit a spot repeatedly.

His slimming down robbed him of any pace and without any tricks to offset that diminished speed it’s left him fairly toothless

You’d be surprised, I wasn’t the one who posted he hit 150 but I do remember seeing him hit 151 in an Ashes if memory serves correct.

 

[MiPiG]

You’d be surprised, I wasn’t the one who posted he hit 150 but I do remember seeing him hit 151 in an Ashes if memory serves correct.

I'm quite certain he did hit 150kph as well. Pretty sure it was 2010/2011 series at the MCG.

 

[footyfan1978]

I wouldn't say either of these two were undervalued

I do though. They were so brilliant and still undervalued.